"I have visited the Blue Nile region of Sudan and seen
for myself the tragic condition of the people who suffer there at the hands
of the brutal National Islamic Front Government." Baroness Caroline
Cox

Sudan News

"EBRIG: Gone Dry"

KOLA BOOF

There is~~~[NO PLACE] between
upper Egypt and lower Sudan; not
even blackness has a place
(to Show)

The hindquarters
of the Devil Beast
is like a thick carpet
smothering our
mothersweet's
Black/Body
"red wined"
inbetween the river
and soot's membrane

All around is Allah
All around is prayer

but there are no
silver fish in
the white clouds anymore
--and when the dawn's
golden beams alight;
there is nowhere

to live.

THE BACKGROUND

The Blue Nile is one of the two main courses of the river Nile.
The Saharan part of the river is formed by the union at the capital of Sudan,
Khartoum, of the White Nile coming from the lacustrine region in Eastern Africa,
and the Blue Nile coming from the Ethiopian Highlands. Though with a shorter
length, the Blue Nile course amounts to more than 60 % of total Nile water flow.
Historically the river was one of the main roads for the contacts between the
clay plains of the arid Sahel and the higher volcanic plateau of Abyssinia,
yet conflicts and wars raged after the first area came under Islamic rule in
the XV century AD (the Funj Sultanate at Sennar). The possibility for the Christian
rulers of the Highlands to control its water flow, even if technically impracticable,
was always seen as a menace by the northerner states.

Although Western explorers have been drawn to the beauty and
mystery of the Blue Nile since Europeans first walked along the shores of Lake
Tana centuries ago, the river was never fully mapped until thirty years ago.

Oil fuels the Government of Sudan war machine. Here are the
major oilfields in Southern Sudan. The GNPOC (Greater Nile Petroleum Operating
Company) is a partnership including NYSE-traded Talisman Energy (TLM), NYSE-traded
PetroChina's parent, China National Petroleum Corporation, and Malaysia's Petronas.
Block 5A is a region including NASDAQ-traded Lundin Oil (LOILY) and Malaysia's
Petronas. The Adar Yel oilfield, less than 50 miles to the immediate west of
the Blue Nile region, is now being developed by NYSE-traded PetroChina's
parent, China National Petroleum Corporation.

The Adar Yel Oil Field is only about 50 miles west of the SPLA-controlled
territory, and has been the cause of much of the recent civilian deaths in the
region. These civilian deaths are because the Government of Sudan desires to
create an "exclusionary zone" around this oil fields. In March-April
of 2000, a Government of Sudan mechanized infantry column attacked eastward
from the Adar Yel oil fields, killing hundreds of civilians as these tanks and
artillery attempted to rid the region of black african peoples. Hundreds
more civilians were killed as a direct result of the scorched earth policy of
this GOS military action.

Background

Darfur has been the scene of one of the worst humanitarian crisis.
According to the United Nations, 750,000 of its six million
inhabitants have been internally displaced by the conflict, while a
further 110,000 have sought refuge in Chad. 10,000 have reportedly
been killed since the eruption o the conflict, many of whom are
civilians. The situation was compounded by the restrictions by the
government of Sudan and the escalation of violence and attacks in the
region making it a no go area for relief agencies or allow for
monitoring of the situation.

Following much international pressure and demands for humanitarian
access a ceasefire truce was signed on 8 April 2004 in N'Djamena
between the GoS and the two main rebel groups, Sudan Liberation
Army/Movement (SLA/M) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM),
which came into effect on 12 April 2004. Under the terms of the deal
signed in the Chadian capital, N'Djamena, the parties have agreed to
cease hostilities within 72 hours, for a renewable period of 45 days.
They have also agreed to guarantee safe passage for humanitarian aid
to the region and to free prisoners of war and to disarm
militias 'Janjaweed' who have been blamed for much of the "ethnic
cleansing" and "atrocities" against civilians.

These concerns were demonstrated in the Report of the Office of the
High Commission for Human Rights mission to Chad, April 5-15, 2004
which reports on a "reign of terror" which includes the following
elements:

AFRICAN UNION

PRESS RELEASE No. 112/2004

The Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union (AU), Alpha Oumar
Konare, expresses serious concern at the deterioration of the security situation
in Darfur, as a result of continued violations, by all the Parties, of the
Humanitarian Ceasefire Agreement signed at N’djamena, Chad, on 8 April
2004, and the Humanitarian and Security Protocols signed on 9 November 2004,
at Abuja, Nigeria.

It should be recalled that, in late November, the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army
(SLM/A) carried out attacks on various places, including Tawilla, in North
Darfur, Adwah village, in South Darfur, the town of Um-Asal and at Draida.
These attacks constitute serious and unacceptable violations of the afore-mentioned
N’djamena Agreement and the Abuja Protocols.

In the same vein, the military operation launched on 8 December 2004, by
the forces of the Government of the Sudan (GoS), at Bilel and Isham, equally
constitutes a serious and unacceptable violation of the Ceasefire Agreement
and the two Protocols, especially as it has been undertaken on the eve of
the resumption of the Inter-Sudanese Peace Talks in Abuja. This operation,
which was meant to “clear roads of lawless elements”, resulted
in foreseeable renewed fighting between the GoS and SLM/A - JEM forces. Immediately
after the launching of this operation, the Chairperson of the Commission approached
the Sudanese authorities and urged them to put an immediate end to the operation.
His Special Representative for the Sudan, Amb. Baba Gana Kingibe, and the
AMIS Force Commander, Maj. Gen F. Okonkwo, have maintained continued contact
with the Sudanese authorities with the view to ending the hostilities.

The Chairperson of the Commission urges all the Parties to put an immediate
end to all hostilities and demands that they abide by the N’djamena
Agreement and the Humanitarian and Security Protocols they signed, as well
as all the relevant decisions and resolutions of the Peace and Security Council
(PSC) of the AU and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

The AU Commission undertakes to bring any serious violations to the attention
of the PSC and the UNSC, as appropriate.

It is the hope of the Chairperson of the Commission that, as the Parties
gather in Abuja to seek a political solution to the conflict, they will make
it their responsibility to fully honour their commitments and create a propitious
atmosphere for the resumption of Inter-Sudanese Peace Talks.

In the meantime, the Commission pledges to redouble its efforts towards
the speedy deployment of AMIS II, to enable it fulfill its expanded mandate,
as decided by the PSC on 20 October 2004.

Addis Ababa, 10 December 2004

Repeated attacks on civilians by Government of Sudan military and its
proxy militia forces with a view to their displacement;

The use of systematic and indiscriminate aerial bombardments and
ground attacks on unarmed civilians;

The use of disproportional force by the Government of Sudan
and the
Janjaweed forces;

That the Janjaweed have operated with total impunity and in
close
coordination with the forces of the Government of Sudan;

The attacks appear to have been ethnically based with the groups
targeted being essentially the following tribes reportedly of African
origin: Zaghawas, Masaalit, and Furs. Men and young boys appear to
have been particularly targeted in ground attacks; and

The pattern of attacks on civilians includes killing, rape, pillage,
including of livestock, and destruction of property, including water
sources."

Sudan: Government Commits 'Ethnic Cleansing'
in Darfur

(New York, May 7, 2004) - The Sudanese government is responsible
for
"ethnic cleansing" and crimes against humanity in the western region
of
Darfur, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today. The
U.N.
Security Council, scheduled today to be briefed on Darfur, should take
measures to reverse this ethnic cleansing by creating conditions for
the
safe return of more than one million people already displaced.

Human Rights Watch called on the Security Council to strongly
condemn
the actions of the Sudanese government and demand that it disarm,
disband and withdraw the Arab militias that engage in ethnic cleansing,
frequently in conjunction with government forces. Two U.N. missions
that
have recently returned from Darfur will address the Security Council
today on the human rights causes as well as humanitarian consequences
of
the conflict.

The 77-page report, "Darfur Destroyed: Ethnic Cleansing
by Government
and Militia Forces in Western Sudan," documents how Sudanese government
forces have overseen and directly participated in massacres, summary
executions of civilians, burnings of towns and villages, and the
forcible depopulation of wide swathes of land long-inhabited by the
Fur,
Masalit and Zaghawa ethnic groups.

"There can be no doubt about the Sudanese government's
culpability in
crimes against humanity in Darfur," said Peter Takirambudde, executive
director of the Africa Division of Human Rights Watch. "The U.N.
Security Council must not ignore the brutal facts."

Human Rights Watch spent 25 days in West Darfur and the vicinity,
documenting abuses in rural areas that were previously populated by
Masalit and Fur communities. Since August, wide swathes of their
homelands, among the most fertile in the region, have been burned and
depopulated. With rare exceptions, the countryside has now been emptied
of its original Masalit and Fur inhabitants.

Villages have been torched not randomly, but systematically
- often not
once, but twice. Livestock, food stores, wells and pumps, blankets and
clothing have all been looted or destroyed.

The occupation of burned and abandoned villages by uncontrolled
Janjaweed has driven civilians into camps and settlements outside the
larger towns. But the Human Rights Watch report documents how even in
these camps, the Janjaweed kill, rape and pillage with impunity. They
sometimes steal what few emergency relief items have reached the
displaced populations.

For months, the Sudanese government has restricted international
media
access to Darfur and has limited reports about the conflict in the
national press. Recently, the government has allowed minimal access to
the region for international humanitarian agencies but has still failed
to provide the necessary protection and assistance to displaced
civilians.

"The humanitarian emergency in Darfur is immense,"
said Takirambudde.
"But a human rights crisis lies behind it. The Security Council must
demand that the Sudanese government take immediate steps to reverse
ethnic cleansing in Darfur."

Thu, May 06, 2004 05:25 UT

Sudan defiant after US walkout at UN, warns against politicising
Darfur

KHARTOUM, May 5 (AFP) -- Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Ismail
vowed his government would not be "intimidated" after US diplomats
staged a walkout at the United Nations in protest at Khartoum's
reelection to the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR).

"We will not be intimidated by force and will not be lacking
in logic
for defending the Sudan," Ismail told reporters.

"We did not want this confrontation but so long as the
United States
wanted it in response to a pressuring group, it should be aware that
the Sudanese diplomacy will remain vigilant and cautious for defending
the Sudan's rights and interests, however the position of the US
administration is".

Ismail said Khartoum would continue to try to open channels
of
communication with Washington. "We are convinced that it is a power
that must be neutralised."

But he hit out at US championing of human rights charging that
"the
world's greatest advocate of human rights" was in fact "the world's
greatest violator of human rights and the whole world is aware of this
fact."

Before its walkout from the UN Economic and Social Council Tuesday,
Washington accused the Sudanese authorities of a litany of abuses in
the restive western region of Darfur which it said made them unworthy
of reelection to the UNCHR.

Another Sudanese minister hit back earlier Wednesday at the
growing US
criticism of his government's policies in Darfur, warning relief
operations in the region might "be impaired if the Darfur problem is
turned into a political issue."

State Humanitarian Affairs Minister Mohamed Yusuf Abdullah also
warned
aid organizations not to take positions on the civil war in the region
between rebel groups drawn from indigenous non-Arab ethnic minorities,
and government troops and their Arab militia allies.

Political disagreements among relief groups "would greatly
harm their
performance and the affected people will be harmed likewise," said
Abdullah.

Several relief organisations have accused the Arab militias
of
terrorising the population, prompting the government to try to
distance itself from their actions.

Khartoum has also faced criticism from Western governments over
the
obstacles it has placed in the way of foreign missions wanting to
visit Darfur to assess the situation on the ground.

Abdullah said the government had agreed to open new distribution
centres outside the capitals of the three states that make up Darfur
to speed up aid delivery.

The minister identified the new centres as Juldu, Olu and Roky
Ru in
the eastern part of the central Jebel Marra massif and Ambru, Tina and
Kornoi in North Darfur State.

According to the United Nations, since the start of the Darfur
rebellion in February last year, well over a million people have fled
their homes, with 95,000 of them taking refuge in neighbouring Chad.

KHARTOUM (Reuters) - Fighting has erupted between Sudanese government
forces and rebels in the west of the country despite a cease-fire
signed last month, military and security sources said Wednesday.

Neighboring Chad said the fighting had spilled over the border
and
that its army clashed with Sudanese pro-government militia 15 miles
inside Chadian territory, with seven people killed in the violence.

The fighting breaks a truce put in place to enable delivery
of urgent
food and medical supplies to hundreds of thousands of people forced
from their homes. Aid groups have issued warnings of a humanitarian
crisis.

The sources in the impoverished region of Darfur, who asked
not to be
identified, told Reuters that clashes on the Sudanese side of the
border around Abu Gamra, 28 miles north of the town of Kebkabiya, had
involved forces led by Sudan's army.

"We are still fighting factions of the rebels. ... We have
to destroy
them. These are our orders," a senior Sudanese military source told
Reuters, speaking by telephone from Darfur.

"This is the third day of fighting. Some of the rebels
refuse to
accept that they have to lay down their arms."

Another Sudanese security source in Darfur confirmed that clashes
with
the rebels were continuing in the area around Abu Gamra. He said they
involved Sudanese regular forces and an irregular group of local
fighters commanded by the army.

A spokesman for the Sudan Liberation Army, or SLA, one of the
two
rebel forces in the area, had no immediate comment.

Rebels in Darfur have accused the government of breaking the
cease-
fire in the past and blamed some fighting on pro-government Arab
militia, called Janjaweed. They say the militia, dubbed outlaws by the
government, have been armed by Khartoum.

INCURSIONS INTO CHAD

Emmanuel Nadingar, acting defense minister in Chad, said the
Janjaweed
had attacked civilians inside Chad early Wednesday, killing six of
them before being chased back over the border.

"Our forces clashed with the Janjaweed. We lost a commandant,"
he
said. "The Chadian government strongly condemns this clash."

The U.N. World Food Program says the regional conflict has forced
more
than one million people from their homes in Darfur and caused 100,000
Sudanese refugees to cross the border into Chad.

Khartoum and two rebel factions signed a truce on April 8 to
allow
urgent aid to get through, but aid workers say they face a race
against time to deliver supplies before rains start later this month,
making many roads unusable.

Rebels took up arms against the Khartoum government in February
2003,
demanding a fairer share of power and Sudan's resources. The western
conflict has raged as the government has moved closer to ending more
than two decades of civil war in the south of the country.

(Additional reporting by Betel Miarom in N'Djamena, Shasta Darlington
in Rome and Francois Murphy in Vienna)

WASHINGTON, May 5 (AFP) -- US Secretary of State Colin Powell
ruled
out sending foreign troops to quell the conflict in Sudan's western
region of Darfur, calling for greater international pressure on
Khartoum to rein in government-backed militias.

There is no army that is going to go in there and put down the
insurrection," Powell told reporters at the State Department. "We
have
got to use the pressure of the international community on Khartoum.

"We have to have greater response from the international
community to
put pressure on the Sudanese to call off these militia units that are
causing trouble so we can get relief to these people," he said, adding
that he just made that point in a phone call with his German
counterpart Joschka Fischer.

Powell's comments came as a spokesman for the government of
Chad said
their soldiers and pro-Khartoum militia clashed Wednesday in Chadian
territory just over the border from war-torn Darfur.

The Arab militias, known as Janjawids, are also accused of continuing
to attack civilians in Darfur, where a year-old war has killed at
least 10,000 people and forced a million more to flee their homes in
what the United Nations says is the world's worst humanitarian crisis
at present.

Last month, UN chief Kofi Annan said the international community
should begin looking at all possible options -- including the
possibility of peacekeepers -- to deal with the Darfur situation.

Although Powell dismissed that idea, he and other US officials
have
been at the forefront of a campaign to press the Sudanese government
into allowing humanitarian access to Darfur.

Washington has complained bitterly that Khartoum has prevented
urgently needed assistance from reaching the people of Darfur,
although Powell noted that members of a US disaster relief team had
now been granted visas and would be traveling to the region shortly.

On Tuesday, the United States made clear its displeasure with
Sudan
over Darfur by walking out of United Nations meeting in New York at
which Khartoum was re-elected to the UN Commission on Human Rights.

US Criticizes Sudan's Election to Human
Rights Commission

United States Department of State (Washington, DC)
DOCUMENT
May 4, 2004
Posted to the web May 5, 2004
Washington, DC

The United States walked out of a May 4 meeting of the United
Nations'
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to protest the nomination of
Sudan to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights.

Calling Sudan's candidacy "entirely inappropriate,"
U.S. Ambassador
Sichan Siv said that "with credible reports continuing to come out of
Sudan regarding the most serious human rights violations in Darfur,
Sudan's membership on the commission threatens to undermine not only
its work but its very credibility."

Both the Commission on Human Rights in Geneva and U.N. Secretary-
General Kofi Annan at U.N. headquarters in New York have expressed
deep concern over the situation in Sudan, especially the human rights
violations in Darfur, likening it to ethnic cleansing.

Saying that the United States would not participate "in
this
absurdity," Siv urged ECOSOC to consider the implications of having
Sudan continue as a member of the human rights commission. He said it
will make the rights group become "a safe-haven for the world's worst
human rights violators."

Sudan was one of four candidates nominated by the African group
for
the continent's four vacant seats on the commission. Unopposed, Sudan
was elected to the commission along with Guinea, Kenya and Togo.
Others elected to the commission in the May 4 voting were Romania,
Armenia, Ecuador, Mexico, Malaysia, Pakistan, Republic of Korea,
Canada, Finland, and France.

Following is the text of Ambassador Siv's remarks:

Statement by Ambassador Sichan Siv, U.S. Representative to the
Economic and Social Council, at the Economic and Social Council,
Regarding the Candidacy of Sudan for the Commission on Human Rights,
May 4, 2004

The United States is perplexed and dismayed by the decision
to put
forward Sudan -- a country that massacres its own African citizens --
for election to the UN Commission on Human Rights (CHR). This will
mark the third consecutive term that the African Group has presented
Sudan as a CHR candidate in a clean slate. This year, above all
previous years, my delegation believes that this candidature is
entirely inappropriate.

With credible reports continuing to come out of Sudan regarding
the
most serious human rights violations in Darfur, Sudan's membership on
the Commission threatens to undermine not only its work, but its very
credibility. On the final day of its 60th session last month -- just
11 days ago -- the Commission articulated its deep concerns about the
human rights situation in Sudan. It adopted a decision calling for the
appointment of an independent expert to monitor the situation in
Darfur. While at the time, my Government made it clear that it
advocated a much stronger resolution on the situation in Darfur, the
difference between the U.S. position and that of most of the
Commission members was a matter of tactics -- that is, how best to
persuade the Government of Sudan to stop abusing its citizens --
rather than different assessments of the situation in Darfur. It was
clear to us, and to most of the Commission, that a human rights and
humanitarian crisis of tragic scale was occurring in Sudan.

On April 7, Secretary General Kofi Annan participated in the
commemoration of the 10th anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda at the
UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. He delivered a strong
condemnation of the Sudan Government's behavior in Darfur, and likened
events there to "ethnic cleansing." The report of the Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights mission to Chad from April 5 to 15,
2004, had reported the "possibility that civilian areas have been
directly targeted." It discussed reports of indiscriminate killing of
civilians and a "policy using rape and other serious forms of sexual
violence as a weapon of war." The mission reported "killings, rape,
burning and looting of villages...(and) massive displacement." It
pointed to a "dire humanitarian crisis" in Darfur, including
disappearances of "women, children, (and) the elderly."

As the reality of Darfur unfolded, even Sub-Saharan African
nations,
which had been solidly behind Sudan's efforts to block Commission
action on Sudan, began to press for action on Darfur. However, in the
end, the U.S. Delegation lost the fight for a stronger resolution
condemning Sudan. But the LEAST we should be able to do is to NOT
elect a country to the only global body charged specifically with
protecting human rights, at the precise time when tens of thousands of
its citizens are being murdered or left to die of starvation.

We urge you today to consider the implications of having Sudan
continue as a member of the Human Rights Commission. Consider the
ramifications of standing by and allowing the Commission to become a
safe-haven for the world's worst human rights violators, especially
one engaged in "ethnic cleansing." Consider the impact that this will
have on the Commission's reputation. Consider how it will affect the
Commission's ability to function effectively as the world's protector
of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The U.S. will not participate in this absurdity. Our delegation
will
absent itself from the meeting rather than lend support to Sudan's
candidacy. We ask that the Secretariat take note of our action in the
record of this session. This decision flows from our commitment to the
CHR. It's our belief that the Commission must adhere to high standards
if it is to have credibility and achieve the purposes for which it was
created.

We strongly urge delegations to use this election as an opportunity
to
express concerns about the grave human rights situation in Sudan,
rather than lend their support to Sudan's candidacy.

Thank you Madame President.

News Article by CNN posted on May 05,
2004 at 09:10:32: EST (-5 GMT)

Clashes erupt in Sudan despite cease-fire

CAIRO, Egypt (Reuters) -- Fighting has erupted between Sudanese
government forces and rebels in western Sudan despite a cease-fire
signed last month to halt the conflict, Sudanese military and security
sources said on Wednesday.

The sources in the impoverished region of Darfur, who asked
not to be
identified, told Reuters that clashes around Abu Gamra, about 45 km
(28 miles) north of the town of Kebkabiya, involved forces commanded
by Sudan's army.

"We are still fighting factions of the rebels. The fighting
is
continuing. We have to destroy them. These are our orders," a senior
Sudanese military source told Reuters, speaking by telephone from
Darfur.

"This is the third day of fighting. Some of the rebels
refuse to
accept that they have to lay down their arms," he said.

When asked about the cease-fire agreement, he said: "These
agreements
are international pieces of paper. We have our responsibilities here
on the ground."

Truce signing
Rebels in Darfur have accused the government of violating the cease-
fire previously and blamed some fighting on pro-government Arab
militia, called Janjaweed. They say the militia, who the government
calls outlaws, have been armed by Khartoum.

Khartoum and two rebel factions signed a truce on April 8 to
allow
urgent aid to reach about one million people affected by the conflict.
Aid workers say they face a race against time to deliver supplies
before rains start later in May.

Another Sudanese security source in Darfur confirmed clashes
with the
rebels were persisting in the area around Abu Gamra. He said they
involved regular Sudanese forces and an irregular force of local
fighters commanded by the army.

A spokesman for the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), one of the
two rebel
forces in the area, had no immediate comment.

U.N. officials have said the situation in Darfur is one of the
world's
worst humanitarian crises, with more than 110,000 refugees encamped in
neighboring Chad.

Rebels took up arms against the government in February 2003,
demanding
a fairer share of power and Sudan's resources. The western conflict
has raged as the government has moved closer to ending a more than two-
decade-old civil war in the south.

Sudan Organisation Against Torture

SOAT Press Release: 4 May 2004

Eight arrested and tortured in Jeway
Kheen

On 19 March 2004 the armed forces and the military intelligence, under
leadership of the First lieutenant, Daffa Ala Mahmoud Almasalli,
arrested eight (8) persons from Jeway Kheen village in suspicion of
participating in an attack on Bouram town on the 10 March 2004 by the
SLA rebel forces. Their details are as follows:

Following their arrest they were detained in a military camp
in Bouram
for nine (9) days then transferred them to Nyala where they were
detained in a military prison. On 2 April 2004, one of the detainees,
Alsadig Ahamed Harba, was released. The other seven (7) detainee's
whereabouts are unknown.

It has been reported that the eight (8) detainees have been subjected
to torture during their custody in the military camp in Bouram.
Military intelligence officers tied them to each other with robes and
put them into a lorry for four (4) days without food or enough water;
they were beaten with sticks and gun butts; punched and kicked; tied
by the legs and arms upside down against a tree for many hours and Mr.
Haroon had metal objects inserted into his rectum. It has been reprted
to SOAT that they were not provided with any food for three days after
thier arrival to the militry prison in Nyala

CORRESPONDENCE FROM PEOPLE ON THE GROUND.

Phil Heilberg wrote:

I have just left Nairobi and spent the last week with various members of the
SPLM. We came with excitement especially with the supposed peace process near
but our optimism changed to disappointment then to anger then to disbelief and
then it changed our view of the stability of the SPLM as a whole.

There a number of critical dynamics going on here that we think
has weakened the longevity of the SPLM.

First off, there is clearly a power struggle going on. After
meeting with John Garang, we realized that he no longer has the power he once
had. He is isolated in Naivasha surrounded by advisers who are in over their
heads. In addition, we have witnessed the chief commanders ignoring his orders.
We have been told that there is a struggle between the educated Sudanese and
the soldiers. In addition, the high commanders apparently like the status quo
in that they receive duties and make money on the aid received but do not pass
this along to the government. We witnessed ourselves the reduction of power
of the educated Sudanese whose views were ignored and were accused of being
corrupt and in cahoots with the foreigners to steal the natural resources of
the land.

Second, the country is being controlled by a faction of people
that are naïve,stupid, arrogant, insulant, xenophobic, and suffering from
delusions of grandeur. They are making extremely poor decisions. First off they
have upset the US Government who now believe it is the SPLM that is the problem.
From our vantage point. This is clearly the case. In addition, they don't understand
the riskiness of the investment opportunities in the region. There was an investment
group that wanted to give 90 million to the SPLM before the peace and then to
put billions in infrastructure. After making these people wait for over a week
in their hotel and constantly changing negotiating teams, they finally decided
to talk on the day they were leaving. They made the terms so onerous that they
just laughed and left. In fact, the attorney general of the movement insulted
everyone of them. This is plain stupidity considering that there are no other
companies coming.

Finally, there is in fighting within the movement. Various factions
within the movement are selling out others within. As such, the fighting will
begin within the movement.

With business deals, the South is already reneging on contracts
that it signed just a year ago with the approval of the Chairman.

The South has beaten itself now and refuses to join the international
community.

We would urge extreme caution in dealing with the South even
if there is a peace agreement (which we think now may not last especially with
the announcement that Total will begin exploration in the South).

My thoughts are to deal with Khartoum when sanctions are lifted
as the South is decades away from a proper infrastructure in dealing with the
international community.